Download the entire results presentating PDF

[download_after_email id=”6372″]

Slide 3:


Ozion’s ‘PRM COVID-19 Recovery Survey’ explored the implications of the ongoing pandemic on PRM operations (Passengers with Reduced Mobility) along with the consequences and reactive measures applied by aviation stakeholders.

A collective desire among participants has provided a comparative insight into how airports and service providers have adapted their operations and drafted best practice policies as the world of air travel progressively emerges from a state of collapse to recovery.

The results presented are derived from a targeted sample of 52 key PRM stakeholders (B-level, C-level), including representatives from airports, institutions, airlines, authorities, regulators, and service providers.

Slide 4:

Operational recovery is widely expected within 12 months

  • 61% of total survey participants anticipate operational recovery within a 12-month period.
  • At 79% vs 69%, airports possess a favourable outlook compared to service providers over this period.

Slide 5:

Conflicting ideas from ‘others’

  • Participating airlines conflict in their estimations – 50% v 50%.
  • 100% of participants from ‘other’ organizations (including; regulators, institutions, consultants and authorities…) stated their expectation of a recovery period exceeding 12 months.

Slide 6:

PRM Size vs Recovery Estimation

When investigating the estimated time of recovery by PRM size (defined as total number of PRMs assisted annually), there is a clear indication that those with smaller volumes anticipate a quicker recovery.

  • All survey participants assisting < 50,000 PRMs anticipate recovery within 12 months, 80% of which expect service recovery within a 6-month period.
  • 70% of services/airports that assist 50,000-149,000 anticipate recovery within 12 months, 50% expecting a 6-month recovery
  • Uncertainty presents itself in the 150,000 to 499,999k bracket where 50% maintain a 12-month recovery estimation.

Slide 7:

April saw the biggest closure rate

Comparisons between PRM volumes in 2019 vs 2020 show:

  • 9% of respondents experienced a complete interruption of service in March 2020. 41% stated they remained operational at 50% or lower PRM traffic compared to the same period in 2019.
  • April 2020 saw the largest impact on PRM operations among survey participants. 48% shared that PRM operations had a complete interruption (-100% vs April 2019). 77% of respondents had experienced -90% PRM traffic during this period.
  • A resumption of service was indicated in May where complete closure reduced to 29% of participants, the slow reopening of service saw 48% (+19%) operating at -90% of May 2019 traffic.

Slide 8:

PRM traffic looks set to gradually return in July 2020

  • The trend continues in June 2020 (vs June 2019). 100% closures are reduced to 14% of participants, a small change occurs in those operating at 90% (-3%). The significant change is the increase in operations witnessing -70% traffic with 23% of participants indicating a ‘positive’ trend)
  • June indicates the first occurrence of traffic performing at 50% or less  during the same period as last year.
  • July 2020, 30% of participants anticipate -30% PRM volumes compared to 2019, 50% remain at -90% but only 10% expect to remain at complete closure of service.

Slide 11:

The anticipation of contract revisions are not mutually shared

  • A contrasting vision towards the contract renewals/revisions has emerged:
  • Only 46% of airports vs 64% of service providers anticipate that existing contracts will be revised.
    Upon investigating any potential commonalities (geographic location, PRM volumes.) among airports and providers and their stated expectations, none could be found.

Kevin Knight

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *